S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd. v. CIT, Calcutta

83 ITR 700Supreme Court of India1972#820 most cited

What is S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd. v. CIT, Calcutta authority for?

Income from sources not falling under any other head of income under Section 14 of the Income Tax Act is taxed under the residuary head 'income from other sources'. If income cannot be taxed under Section 45 (capital gains), it cannot be taxed at all.

126

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2025.

Also referred to as

S.G. Mercantile Corporation v. CIT · Section 14 · income from other sources · residuary head of income · Section 45 · capital gains · taxing income

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 194-ISection 2(13)Section 24Section 37(1)Section 119

Issues it is cited on

section 57profits and gains of business or professionsection 32section 56income from other sourcessection 36(1)section 14aprevious yearsection 143(2)transfercompanybusiness

Judgments citing S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd. v. CIT, Calcutta

ITO, Ward - 3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Pdp Steels Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 2407/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 80I

…ved from its undertaking thus making it eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC of the Act. It was brought to our notice that the Hon’ble Guwahati High Court while deciding the case relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT Vs. Govinda Choudhury (1993) 203 ITR 881 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that the interest awarded to the assessee therein in an arbitration proceeding for delayed payment in a contract executed by the assessee was to be recorded as business income and could not be treated as ‘income from other sources’ and upheld the action of the Tribunal. So, according to Ld. AR in the present ca…

Btw-Atlanta Transformers India Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1642/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Mar 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri S.N.Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

…d "Income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in s. 14 of the Act. The head "Income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corporation (P) Ltd. vs. CIT1972 CTR (SC) 8 : (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT vs. Govinda Choudhury & Sons (1994) 116 CTR (SC) 61 : (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds pr…

Hazaribag Ranchi Expressway Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 14(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6696/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negihazaribagh Ranchi Vs. Ito-14(2)(1) 4Th Floor, Expressway Ltd. The Il&Fs Financial Center Aaykar Bhawan Plot No.C-22, G Block M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aacch2490J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 234BSection 56(1)

…xed under the head "income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in section 14 of the Act. The head "income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corpn. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1972] 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT v. Govinda Choudhury & Sons [1993] 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for infusi…

M/S. Parmar Properties Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 4, Pune

Appeal are allowed

ITA 2262/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 2261 & 2262/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Jatin C. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 24

…the action of the authorities below is certain decisions which, in turn, are based on the judgments of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in East India Housing & Land Development Trust VS. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC) and S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC). It has been held in the latter decision that where a builder, being, owner lets out property for some time pending sale, the income so derived is to be taxed under the head “Income from house property” and not as “Business income”.So the ratio is that even if a builder lets out his property, held as stock in trade, income there from will be…

M/S. Parmar Properties Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 4, Pune

Appeal are allowed

ITA 2261/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos. 2261 & 2262/Pun/2017 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Jatin C. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 24

…the action of the authorities below is certain decisions which, in turn, are based on the judgments of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in East India Housing & Land Development Trust VS. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC) and S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC). It has been held in the latter decision that where a builder, being, owner lets out property for some time pending sale, the income so derived is to be taxed under the head “Income from house property” and not as “Business income”.So the ratio is that even if a builder lets out his property, held as stock in trade, income there from will be…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6597/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri A.N. Mishraassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in Section 14 of the Act. The head "income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. 10 See S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, Calcutta; (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT vs Govinda Choudhury & Sons.; (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for infu…

ACIT-17(2), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Urban Infrastructure Fund, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4871/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4871/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit-17(2) बिधम/ Maharashtra-Urban Infrastructure Fund O/O Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Cr-2 Bldg, Ground Floor, Income Tax-17(2), Aayakar Barrister Rajni Patel Road, Bhavan, Room No.123A, 1St Nariman Point, Mumbai- Floor, M. K. Road, Mumbai- 400021. 400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabtm8094M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Ms. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri J. P. Bairagra सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/11/2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 23.05.2018 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -57, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2010- 11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri J. P. BairagraFor Respondent: Ms. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (SR
Section 143(3)

…he year under consideration, the assessee has neither undertaken any business activity nor earned any income from business activity. Accordingly, the AO relying upon various judicial decision in the case titled as (i) CIT Vs. Govinda Choudhury and Sons (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC) (iii) CIT Vs. Coromandal Cement Ltd. 2 A.Y.2010-11 (1998) 234 ITR 412 (SC) and (iv) CIT Vs. Autokast Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 110 (SC) allowed expenses of Rs.43,247/- incurred for the purpose of earning interest income and disallowed the balance expenses totaling to Rs.1,96,74,479/-. 4. Bein…

Mr. Sunil Goyal, Noida vs. ITO, New Delhi

Appeal is disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions

ITA 719/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri R. Santhanam, Adv. and Shri Deepak Ostwal, CA and Shri Rishabh Ostwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 28

….CIT (1957) 32 ITR 688(SC) iii) East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. Vs.CIT(1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC) Page 36 of 42 ITA No.- 719/Del/2010 Shri Sunil Goyal. iv) CIT Vs. Chugandas & Co. (1964) 55 ITR 17(SC) v) S G Mercantile Corporation Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) 8. In the present case there is no dispute that the shares were held by the assessee as long term capital asset and hence the same should taxed only under the head ‘capital gain’ as offered by the assessee. However, only because of the higher rate of tax applicable to business income the AO had attempted to bring the consideration for transf…

M/S Tenughat Emta Coal Mines Ltd., Ranchi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Ranchi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 56/RAN/2015[07-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Manish Mallick Adv & L.N.Mallick, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 147Section 148

…head "income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in Section 14 of the Act. The head "income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd vs CIT, Calcutta; (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT vs Govinda Choudhury & Sons.; (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for inf…

Gspc Pipavav Power Company Ltd.-Gppc, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1613/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar &For Respondent: Shri/Ms. Sonia Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…d "Income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in s. 14 of the Act. The head "Income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corporation (P) Ltd. vs. CIT1972 CTR (SC) 8 : (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT vs. Govinda Choudhury & Sons (1994) 116 CTR (SC) 61 : (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds pr…

Shri Jalendra Sahoo, Cuttack vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Bhubaneswar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 9/CTK/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.09/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Shri Jalendra Sahoo, Vs. Ito, Ward-2(3), At-Kirtania, N.M.Padia, Bhubaneswar Bhogarai, Balasore-756081 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan No. : Blxps 3197 M (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Sahu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 37

…anized manner to earn income is a business or trading activity. Hence, business income. Even in "House rent" cases where the assessee receives a fixed house rent it has been decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.G. Mercantile Corporation Vs. CIT, 83 ITR 700 (SC) & Narsingha Kaur Vs. CIT, 113 ITR 712(Ori), CIT Vs. MP. Bajaj & Others, 200 ITR 131(Ori). That an activity carried continuously in an organized manner with a set purpose with a view to earn profit is a business or trading activity and the assessee's earning income from salary & commission like that. So in the instance case since the assessee…

M/S. Goel Raisoni Associates, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1947/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujrathiFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(4)

…under the income from business and profession. The SMC Bench considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking support from the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 83 ITR 700 (SC) and Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 373 ITR 673 (SC), held the income of builder in respect of letting of properties is chargeable to tax under the head profits and gains of business or profession but not under the income from house property. Further, held that there cannot be any taxation to…

Gulmohar Park Mall Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3560/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 57Section 57(2)(iii)

…Supreme Court in the case of Sultan Bros. Pvt Ltd. Vs. CIT reported at 51 ITR 353. The assessee put reliance on the following case laws: (a) Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs. CIT 34 ITR 368 (SC) (b) B P Ray vs. ITO 129 295 (SC) (c) S.V. Mercantile Corpo (P) Ltd vs. CIT, 83 ITR 700 (SC) (d) CIT vs. Khostla India Ltd , 700 (SC) (e) Universal Plant Ltd, 237 ITR 454 (SC) (f) CIT Vs. Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd, 169 ITR 597 (SC) (g) Balaji Enterprises vs. CIT 225 ITR 471 (Kerala) (h) PFH Mall & Retails Mgt. Ltd. Vs. Asst, CIT 16 GOT 83 (Kolkata lTAT). The above case laws are duly considered but the same are not found acceptable in…

Gulmohar Park Mall Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3559/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2019AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 57Section 57(2)(iii)

…Supreme Court in the case of Sultan Bros. Pvt Ltd. Vs. CIT reported at 51 ITR 353. The assessee put reliance on the following case laws: (a) Mazagaon Dock Ltd vs. CIT 34 ITR 368 (SC) (b) B P Ray vs. ITO 129 295 (SC) (c) S.V. Mercantile Corpo (P) Ltd vs. CIT, 83 ITR 700 (SC) (d) CIT vs. Khostla India Ltd , 700 (SC) (e) Universal Plant Ltd, 237 ITR 454 (SC) (f) CIT Vs. Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd, 169 ITR 597 (SC) (g) Balaji Enterprises vs. CIT 225 ITR 471 (Kerala) (h) PFH Mall & Retails Mgt. Ltd. Vs. Asst, CIT 16 GOT 83 (Kolkata lTAT). The above case laws are duly considered but the same are not found acceptable in…

M/S. Shree Balaji Ventures, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 7(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 402/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vipin GujrathiFor Respondent: Shri N. Ashok Babu
Section 23Section 23(4)

…the action of the authorities below is certain decisions which, in turn, are based on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in East India Housing & Land Development Trust VS. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC) and S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC). It has been held in the latter decision that where a builder, being, owner lets out property for some time pending sale, the income so derived is to be taxed under the head “Income from house property” and not as “Business income”. So the ratio is that even if a builder lets out his property, held as stock in trade, income there from will be…

Sugam Vanijya Holdieng P.Ltd, Bengluru vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6722/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2013-14 Sugam Vanijya Holding P. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Vr Bengaluru, No.11B, Survey Circle-24(2), No.40/9, Dyvasandra Industrial Area, New Delhi. 2Nd Stage, Kr Puram Hobli, Bengaluru. Pan: Aaacs1883J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Shri Kanchan Kaushal, Cas & Shri Harpreet Ajmani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.S. Rana, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25.09.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961, Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Construction Of Mixed Commercial Development Projects At Whitefield, Bangalore. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.11.2013 Declaring The Total Income At Rs.13,24,24,139/-. Since The Assessee Had Entered Into Certain International

For Appellant: Shri Deepak ChopraFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…head "income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in Section 14 of the Act. The head "income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd vs CIT, Calcutta; (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT vs Govinda Choudhury & Sons.; (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for infu…

Kaira Dist.Co.Op.Milk Producers Union Ltd., Anand vs. The ACIT., Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3614/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R
Section 35Section 37

…5% of the total cost project as penalty to the Government. And further stated that interest income from the said grant is not taxable and in support of its contention, ld. A.R. cited a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Govind Chaudhary and Sons 203 ITR 881 wherein it is held that interest on such fund is concerned, the same also partakes the character of principal amount and hence the same should also be excluded from the income of the assessee. ITA Nos. 3614/A/15 & 1237/A/16 & Ors. 5 . A.Y. 2011-12 10. In view of the above, we allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. 11. In the result, appe…

Ongc Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 1522/BANG/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Ongc Mangalore Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Petrochemicals Ltd., Income-Tax, Mangalore Special Economic Circle-1(1), Zone, Mangalore. Permude Village, Mangalore – 574 509. Pan : Aafcm 0322 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. B. R. Kamath, Ca Revenue By : Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing : 10.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.03.2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. B. R. Kamath, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. N. Siddappaji, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

…under the head "Income from other sources" only if it does not fall under any other head of income as provided in section 14 of the Act. The head "Income from other sources" is a residuary head of income. See S.G. Mercantile Corporation P. Ltd. v. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) and CIT v. Govinda Choudhury and Sons (1993) 203 ITR 881 (SC). 13. It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure. Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for infu…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…nnually and the return at the time of Divestment of shares are only two limbs of same receipt arising out of same J.V. agreement and therefore they are in nature of ‘Business Income’ as held in the case of CIT vs. Govind Chaudhary & sons dated 22.04.1992 1993 203 ITR 881 SC which says that interest income draws its nature from under lying transaction. 4. Since the return in this case is fixed return of 20% on investment which is never associated with share investment per se, because return on shares in a private limited company is highly Illiquid and suffers from volatility in life insurance market therefore, th…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1763/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…nnually and the return at the time of Divestment of shares are only two limbs of same receipt arising out of same J.V. agreement and therefore they are in nature of ‘Business Income’ as held in the case of CIT vs. Govind Chaudhary & sons dated 22.04.1992 1993 203 ITR 881 SC which says that interest income draws its nature from under lying transaction. 4. Since the return in this case is fixed return of 20% on investment which is never associated with share investment per se, because return on shares in a private limited company is highly Illiquid and suffers from volatility in life insurance market therefore, th…